This film offers an absolutely brutally honest account of racism and colonialism. Despite my admiration for Scorcese as a filmmaker, Killers of the Flower Moon was a whimpy, white-washed version of exploitation compared to what Felipe Gálvez Haberle and his team delivers in Los Colonos. It's a gripping tale well told.
I also thought cinematographer Simone D'Arcangelo's decisions were fantastic. All of it served to highlight the grim truth of the situation.

Awareness taps into a, by now, well worn, supernatural/superhero trope but does so with enough intimacy and depth, to make it inherently watchable.
There's the predictable superhero, action formula you would expect, with something of an opaque, good guy bad guy set up. What really sets this production apart however, is the depth of characterisation. You get a real sense of the relationship between the key character and his adoptive father, that lifts this film above many of its emotionally shallower, counterparts.
Acting is decent too but then it comes with a cast of mostly well known, Spanish actors. Narrative is capably scripted and thoughtful, dodging most of the trite cliches, you might expect in a film, of this kind.
In summary, an action movie with a soul. It has subs but this was hardly an impediment, to this reviewers enjoyment. Well worth your time.

The most significant revolutions often begin with one individual, eventually leading to a transformation within an entire community. "Radical," inspired by a true story, embodies this journey, enriched by scientific and philosophical insights that bring hope and inspiration to a world that feels bleak and challenging. The film draws parallels to the beloved classic "Dead Poets Society," with Sergio stepping into the role of a modern-day Prof. Keating in a remarkable classroom setting. He dares to challenge conventional teaching methods, offering an alternative approach rooted in curiosity, dialogue, and active participation. As Sergio navigates numerous obstacles, he surpasses his own expectations, though not without facing tragic consequences. This film critiques the current education system, which often produces individuals who function like machines rather than critical thinkers. True learning is a dynamic process filled with discussions, explorations, and a multitude of questions, rather than mere memorization of textbook pages. "Radical" is a source of inspiration, humor, and entertainment, illuminating the path through the darkness of a flawed society.

"Sergio" (Eugenio Derbez) is a new teacher at a primary school in a run-down Mexican town where his unorthodox teaching methods cause a bit of consternation for the head teacher "Chucho" (Daniel Haddad). There's a curriculum that they are supposed to follow and this school is the very worst in the land. To inspire better results, the teachers are offered bonuses if their pupils can improve, so imagine their chagrin when "Sergio" starts upturning tables and using the school's water reservoir to illustrate the relationship between weight and density. Not only must this teacher galvanise his hitherto indifferent students, but he has to win over his sceptical boss else he's going to end up out of a job! What now ensues is based on a true story and I think could be doing with being shown in classrooms everywhere. Not just because it clearly demonstrates the sheer power an inspirational teacher has to enable young minds, but also to remind kids in better off communities that education (with our without technology) is a thing to be valued. This man offers them a template to teach themselves; to solve problems and develop teamwork skills and to realise that their options are not quite as limited as might have seemed when they started compulsory schooling with precious little interest in any of it. It also asks questions about the rigid nature of repetitive learning and invites us to consider what is or isn't a teacher's place in a community that is historically constrained by perceptions of realism. Can any of these youngsters really aim high and deliver, or is it all pipe dreams? There's a fun dynamic between Derbez and Haddad and the storyline allows us to observe some of the more salient issues that affect these people growing up - poverty, drugs, corruption and family all playing their own decisive part in influencing how education fits into their society. Two hours just flies by, here, and there's plenty of entertainment mingled in with the more serious food for thought. Well worth two hours, I'd say.

A decent premise with a passable execution. The film seems like it portrays events relatively faithfully but in doing so perhaps neglects narrative drive or meaningful plot development. I think the film would have been a lot tighter if 15-25 minutes of waiting in the snow was skipped over more briefly. The length of time they were trapped was of course a huge part of their miraculous story but i don't think the film did a great job of portraying that on screen. I kept wondering "why doesn't someone go seeking help when they know no one is looking for them?" and i don't think the film adequately addressed that question either in action or dialogue. Character development was negligible with the film noticeably dragging through the middle portion without a compelling reason. Not a film i'll likely remember nor one i'd recommend seeing.

If you're at all familiar with Ethan Hawke's "Alive" (1993) then you'll have the gist of this story of the Uruguayan rugby team whose aircraft came down after heavy turbulence, stranding them amidst the wreckage high up in the Andes mountains. Of the forty who embarked, only sixteen remain and it now falls to them to demonstrate the ultimate in team spirit if they are to fight the cold, hunger, fear, avalanches and each other to survive. Juan Bayona has created a really uncomfortable film to watch here, engendering some strong performances from Enzo Vogrincic (Turcatti) and Agustín Pardella (Nando) as they are forced to drink melted snow and - well you can use your imagination as to how they had to find enough food to survive the sub-zero temperatures whilst - they hoped - help would find them. It's the pristine cinematography that helps this stand out - we really do get a sense of the hostility of this terrain, the cold and the dark; the cloud line making an airborne search for them all but impossible. Should some of them set off to search lower down or is their greater safety in numbers? It's history, so we do know what happened back in 1972 - but even that doesn't impact too much on the gradually increasing senses of peril, claustrophobia and terror and of the best and worst aspects of human nature when facing a crisis. An ensemble effort really, with a team of actors presenting a convincing and compellingly chilling tale of survival that's well crafted by those behind the camera too.

Pretty realistic movie of the events of the tragedy of the uruguayan flight with the that crashed in the Andes in 72, showing the strive for survival and realistic events that occurred (including the cannibalism as last resort for survival when the searches were stopped).
The film closed the 80th Venice International Film Festival, and was selected as the Spanish entry for the Best International Feature Film at the 96th Academy Awards.
The flight was carrying 45 passengers and crew, including 19 members of the Old Christians Club rugby union team, along with their families, supporters and friends. Out of the initial crash, 33 people survived but with natural exposure, starvation, infection and other causes the final number was 16. This because, two survivors, Nando Parrado and Roberto Canessa, climbed the 4,650-metre (15,260 ft) mountain peak on the western rim of the glacier cirque without any mountaineering gear whatsoever and hiked for 10 days into Chile to seek help, traveling 61 km (38 miles) to find a rescue team by helicopters.
On 23 December 1972, two months after the crash, all 16 remaining survivors were rescued. The news of their miraculous survival drew worldwide headlines and evolved into a media circus about the fact of cannibalism.
The director J. A. Bayona (The Orphanage, The Impossible, A Monster Calls, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom), discovered the book of one of the survivors while researching material for the Impossible and bought the rights for the book when he finished filming that movie, while taking more than 100h of interviews with the survivors, and was shoot in location around the crash site and into the actual crash site coasting mor than 60 million Euros.
The cinematography by Pedro Luque (Antbellum, Don't Breathe , Blue Beetle, The Girl into the Spider Web) is pretty gritty and realistic, and prosthetics by David Martí and Montse Ribé, Academy Award–winning special effects makeup artists of Pan's Labyrinth were used.
In general the best of the movie depicting the events, in a more than realistic way than Alive.
Score: 8.1 out of 10.0 / A-

Pass me another piece of Society of the Snow. One shot of them walking the ridge made me nauseous. Mind-bending natural prison takes a while to come to light. Nice and personal, close shots keep the focus on the characters otherwise. Great crash scene. Ooohhhh my ankles.

Society of the Snow is an incredible yet harrowing survival drama exemplifying true grit and trauma
My Score : 90/100
Based on true events and a book by the same name, Society Of The Snow follows the story of a Uruguayan Rugby team whose plane crashes in the Andes Mountains while being on their way to Chile. Society of the Snow is haunting survival drama which accounts for the 70 days of the survivors in the sea of snow between the borders of Argentina and Chile. With a spine chilling screenplay and tragic events that follow, the film never feels 150mins long. I was just a hopeless spectator of the trauma the survivors went through. As gut wrenching and painful it may seem, the film efficiently exemplifies true grit and determination for survival which kept the Uruguyans going.
The cinematography is incredibly good capturing some beautiful frames of the landscape while balancing it with tight close-ups that will evoke a sense of claustrophobia in you too. The editing is crisp and sharp wherein the length of the drama never bothered me. Director J.A. Bayona has excelled in focusing on the event rather than deep diving into character studies. His direction is top notch. Its a crime not to highlight the excellent sound design which shifts gears with tragic turn of events. Ensemble performances are fantastic and make it more realistic. The conversations are emotional and dialogues are equally well written which leaves a lasting impression.
Overall, With a runtime of 145mins Society of the Snow shines as one of the most eventful screenplays of the genre that makes you gasp for your breath at various junctures of the narrative. It is intense, harsh and quite overwhelming thus making for an intriguing and incredible watch. Survival dramas at its finest. Spain’s Official Entry to the Academy Awards this year and I cant agree more.
Instagram & X : @streamgenx

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://fandomwire.com/society-of-the-snow-review-a-harrowing-tale/
"Society of the Snow unquestionably solidifies J. A. Bayona's status as an absurdly underrated filmmaker.
One of the most unbelievable, harrowing survival stories ever recreated, brought to life by a truly remarkable ensemble cast, breathtaking cinematography that captures the awe-inspiring yet treacherous landscapes, a deeply stirring score that tugs at the heartstrings, and a plane crash sequence like you've never seen before.
The convergence of these elements transforms an admittedly predictable survival piece into a visceral, emotionally resonant experience, urging audiences to reflect on the thoughtfully handled themes of human resilience, beliefs, and perseverance.
A must-watch, especially on the big screen if possible."
Rating: A-

The Coens are experts in their ability to write a political satire, or a movie with a strong political message, and make it feel natural and organic to the plot so much so that, even if you don't agree with whatever they are trying to say, you don't care because they are still telling a great story...and the story always comes first.
However, put George Clooney at the helm and all the talent that the Coens have for expertly into a stylish story goes straight out the window.
And the result is...a bore.
Clooney put the politics above the story and you can tell. It felt preachy, it felt pretentious, it felt like a lecture...What it didn't feel like was entertainment.
But that's what happens when you have a great script with a strong political message...and you decide that the political message has to be front and center, in your face, at the expense of actually telling a story.
Had the Coen's actually directed it, they could have sold the audience the same message, without making it feel like it was forced down your throat.

**A film that recreates the modus vivendi of the 50s suburbs, but fails to give us a story with tension and suspense that we can adhere to.**
Any Cohen Brothers film is always a film that promises not to be like any other. Their style is quite unique and does not suit everyone. And this time they bring us a film that is entirely about the importance of appearances, the rottenness they cover up, and a certain self-destruction latent beneath an impeccable appearance. It's a film that tries to teach us that nothing is what it seems, nothing is perfect, there are no paradises on Earth, and everything that seems too perfect always has something decadent or spoiled behind it. Yet another film that promises to annoy those who see it... a nuisance that helps us understand why the film was so poor at the box office.
This is the lesson of Suburbicon, a seemingly perfect and very friendly community, all white Caucasians, with impeccable houses, cars and lawns, which will begin to experience days of enormous turmoil and riot when a black family decides to move there. The family in question seems as impeccable as they are, and as wealthy as any of their neighbors... but they are black, and that is enough to be undesirable in the eyes of the neighbors. At the same time, one of those impeccable families begins to implode after a home invasion results in a murder and, days later, an inspector shows up, thinking it's all a crime committed to grab the life insurance money.
As we can see, the script is not difficult to describe succinctly, despite joining two plots that, alone, could make a solo film. Set in the 1950s, the film shows us how the suburban neighborhood was born, with a large urbanization boosted by the growing prosperity and purchasing power of a rapidly growing middle class. However, throughout the film, the feeling of artificiality and falsehood that surrounds the neighborhood (and that ideal family in particular) is accentuated, in proportion to the suspicions of the authorities and the hostility towards the black family. Unfortunately, the film fails to convey that tension to the audience, and the atmosphere is never as thick and disturbing as it should be.
George Clooney may not be part of the cast, but he ensures a safe direction and is aware of what he wants... although he doesn't seem to know exactly how to get there! He takes great efforts in the most technical and artistic points, in the sets design, in the recreation of the period, but he fails to shape the environment in such a way that the tension and suspense can be built up on the way to the climax, nor that the cast corresponds with the same effort and commitment. The proof is Matt Damon, who brings the protagonist to life in a lukewarm way, similar to what he did in _Good Shepherd_ (the similarity between characters, from a visual and behavioral point of view, is huge and not pleasant). Julianne Moore turns out to be the best actress here, with a good performance where she combines a calculating and meticulous spirit with an appearance of an ideal housewife.
Technically, it's a well-executed film on many levels: the cinematography is colorful, vivid, and the filming work was well done. The sets manage to resurrect the idyllic appearance of the middle-class suburb of the 50s, with the sets betting on period furniture and colors between green and pink. The cars are an important part of the movie, and they are all magnificent. The costumes, most particularly Moore's, are also excellent and bring back the women's fashion of that period. Alexander Desplat signs the soundtrack and does a very well executed job.

Not as dark or heart-wrenching as it could've, and perhaps should've, been. With that noted, 'Eight Below' - a remake of 1983's 'Antarctica' - is still a fairly decent survival drama.
The cast certainly elevate my feelings towards the film, with Paul Walker impressing in the lead role; it comes across as if he actually does have a bond with the dogs, which is obviously key.
It's very much Walker's show, but Bruce Greenwood, Jason Biggs and Moon Bloodgood all add small but welcomed things with their characters. The dogs themselves are great and do a lot of good work onscreen, a load of which being pretty believable.
There are saddening parts to it, for sure, but overall I wanted a more deeper ride with this premise than what I got, but there's definitely reasons to watch it.

A bit of a snooze, but not without its charms

In theory, this ought to have been much better - but somehow it just doesn't ever get going. The story centres around "Sam" who has the most damnable ill-luck. If it can go wrong for her (and those around her) then you can bet your last lucky penny then it will! Sitting, despondently, outside a café one day, she shares her sandwich with a black cat and thereafter her adventures start as she discovers this cat comes from the land of luck. Good luck, actually, reigned over benignly by the dragon (Jane Fonda). As with everything, though, it's an equilibrium and there is a fine balance to be had with bad luck - which they try to contain in a machine. Her arrival spells doom for this finely stable environment. Soon she and the cat "Bob" are having to spin plates a-plenty to stop their universe collapsing into chaos. It's far too wordy and worthy - the sentiment was all just a bit too sweet, sugary and over-whelming for me. It is a perfectly adequate production and the animation does enough, but at 1¾ it's all just to thinly stretched out and actually quite slow. It will be fine for the kids on the television at Christmas, but it's very limited cinema release speaks volumes...

**Overall : Luck feels as warm and familiar as a favorite blanket reminding us of some of our favorite Pixar movies from 25 years ago.**
A sweet movie with a sweet message. John Lasseter’s return to animation felt like a return to the Pixar stories of the 90s - hope-filled stories about finding meaningful friendships and family. Luck had moments of laughter and moments that touched your heart. It didn’t rise to the level of Toy Story or Finding Nemo, but it is definitely a good one. My three-year-old immediately wanted to start it over again when it ended, and she loved the fun creatures and bright-colored worlds. So it looks like Luck will be around the house quite a bit for the next few months.

MORE SPOILER-FREE REVIEWS @ https://www.msbreviews.com/
"Luck meets the minimum requirements of having a light story with simple characters and sweet messages, but it's far from an inspiring, imaginative, incredibly entertaining work.
The humor related to the protagonist's misfortunes induces some moments of laughter, but even these are cliches repeated countless times throughout the history of cinema. Strangely, the 3D animation fails to offer expressiveness and emotion to the characters, being limited to the beautiful environment that surrounds the narrative.
The score tries to elevate the overall film with sentimental tunes and melodies, but unfortunately, it's not enough to avoid the first animated disappointment of the year."
Rating: C

Midnight Express is a harrowing story based on true events.
Brad Davis delivers an outstanding performance with great supporting roles from John Hurt, Randy Quaid. It was an adapted Screenplay written by Oliver Stone which won him his first Oscar.
Georgia Maroda (spelling)soundtrack is really riveting as the ‘chase’ scene unfolds.
This is a movie that will stay with you for life.
They say that ‘Midnight Express’ did to Turkeys tourism, what ‘Jaws’ did to bathing in the sea.
Highly recommended.

On Valentines Day in 2014, Universal released the second adaptation of Endless Love, Scott Spencer's 1979 National Book Award nominated novel. The 1981 film adaptation received 6 Golden Raspberry nominations, so it is fair to say that Spencer's novel didn't lend itself well to screen the first time around.
The 2014 tells the story of when 17-year-old Jade (Gabriella Wilde) graduates high school with high hopes for an impressive scholarship, she looks back with some regret at having neglected her social life. Classmate David (Alex Pettyfer) has had a crush on Jade throughout high school, but never acted on it. A chance meeting between the two sets in motion a deep summer love, much to the disapproval of Jade's father (Bruce Greenwood), who determines David to be a bad influence on his daughter.
Time is a valuable asset in filmmaking, especially when setting the scene for a movie. Back stories must be set out, and then fleshed out, so that it's clear what drives the characters to make the choices they do. _Endless Love_ doesn't feel the need to worry the audience with any of that, starting on Graduation Day with two protagonists who it is admitted have never spoken to each other, and having them fall straight in love.
Jade, who has precious few friends, implying her classmates know very little about her personality, is idolised by David, presumably for being a blonde bombshell. When given the smallest amount of attention from David, Jade then is willing to drop everything that her father has coerced her into working for.
When Daddy shows his disapproval, because he projects expectations of Jade's dead brother onto her, Jade becomes little more than a pawn between her father and David. While Jade's mother appears to be softer towards the relationship, her viewpoint is completely undermined when we learn that her husband is cheating on her (a plot point that seemingly is to further the animosity between David and Jade's father, but becomes completely forgotten about later on).
The acting is passable, but when working with a cardboard screenplay there is very little point.
Endless Love is the worst type of film. Promoting itself as a young woman's choice to leave the clutches of her evil father is both disingenuous, dangerous and damaging to the young women it is aimed at. There is no plot, no backstory, no personality, no point. It is misogynistic, shallow and degrading.
Don't watch this.

Crude, foul mouthed comedy that is not very funny and a plot that is nonsense.
This would had been a better and funnier film if more care had been taken with the script. Otherwise this is a film aimed at stoners and slackers.
Dwayne (Danny McBride) wants to open a massage parlour but needs to get hold of his dad's money who once won the lottery so he hires a hitman to kill him.
To pay the hitman Dwayne kidnaps a pizza delivery boy Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) pus a vest with a time and a bomb on him instructs him to rob a bank and steal the $100,000.
Nick gets his best friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) to help him rob a bank but getting the money to Dwayne is not easy who is planning to double cross him.

Well shot erotic-thriller by Atom Egoyan featuring three good performances from Julianne Moore, Amanda Seyfried (both sharing a steamy sex scene for a mainstream film) and Liam Neeson. Also has a tragic element with Seyfried's character. This is one I've had in my collection for a while but never got around to watching. **3.5/5**

When Nathalie became Chloe.
A remake of 2003 French film Nathalie, Chloe is directed by Atom Egoyan and it stars Julianne Moore, Liam Neeson, Amanda Seyfried and Max Thieriot. Story has Moore as a successful doctor who suspects her husband is being unfaithful with his younger students. Hiring a prostitute to pose as a student and catch him in the act, it sets in wheels the motions of untapped passions and deadly emotions.
It's a bit Hitchcock lite in truth, but the strength of the cast list always keeps the story interesting. The key turns in the plot are to be taken with a pinch of salt, but Egoyan and his team keep things ethereal as the tech credits are splendidly mounted. A safe and solid erotic thriller, even if it's more low-rent than high-grade. 6/10

Absolutely fantastic, really not in to football so started watching with some reluctance but honestly the best series I’ve seen in a long while with every episode delivering a real feel good factor with every episode!
Can’t recommend enough!

I started watching this show as someone who doesn't care at all about football (soccer) and had no expectations for the series. Season 1 starts off slow and the Ted Lasso character is a bit annoying at first, but about halfway through the first season it all really started to click for me and season 2 was just fantastic. Another reviewer talked about the chemistry among the show's cast and I completely agree. I felt like they build the side characters well and a nice amount of the showtime focuses on them. Season 2 also gave me quite a few more chuckles. Overall, a great original series from Apple+ and definitely recommended from me.

An amazingly original, funny and lively show. A great cast with visible chemistry. The show will have you laughing and leave you feeling like you’ve had a really good hug after each episode. Unique in modern times.

Really good watch, would watch again, and can recommend.
There are a lot of confusing aspects to this movie that definitely hurt it, but it starts high enough each time, you just kind of personally pause and then the movie continues as if it wasn't a thing.
The only thing that persists as a problem of casting beautiful adults in the role of children (I just kept going, they don't look like kids), and while I don't remember how much time passes until Dora goes to American high school, it can't be senior year because they have another year after the movie.
I'm pretty sure College Humor covered this joke/problem when they had Ariel Winter ("Modern Family") as Dora and she was 15, but maybe that was the point: yeesh, what a minefield to navigate.
The movie is very well produced, the story is actually well written, and at one point I had the thought that this could have been an Indiana Jones plot with some expected tweaks.
There are a few things that just break the experience, and I don't just mean all the cringe moments when you put jungle girl into high school.
She's literally insane, they address it multiple times in the movie, and it's the opening scene. Fortunately she's such a likeable character that you forget, until it's convenient to remind you.
The animals: spoiler or not, the crazy cg animals really mess with your suspension of disbelief and bring you out of the movie: there is literally a plot armor moment where they just make the solution "an animal does something impossible". And they talk about it, there are multiple discussions about these animals doing impossible things.
It really is a good movie, and I think it is designed the way it is to be family friendly. Worth taking the time to watch.

The first 15 minutes of this movie had me worried. As someone who has never seen "Dora the Explorer", the in-jokes (outside of her talking to the audience early on) were completely lost on me. The scenes at the high school were pretty hard to watch, but once she and the group are in the jungles, I didn't mind it so much and the third act very much felt like an homage to Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Isabela Moner was wonderful and not at all obnoxious in the lead and the other teenage-aged actors were alright, but Eugenio Derbez is still an awful actor and the style of humor is certainly aimed at a younger audience. Even so, it was a lot better than I expected. **3.0/5**

This is legit Indiana Jones/Tomb Raider/National Treasure for kids - nothing and no-one is sexualised and there’s no violence, aside from the slapstick kind. Plus the humour is fantastic and friendly, and the film even pokes fun at the original TV show in a really great way. Everything is vibrant and exciting, and who doesn’t love a monkey sidekick and a thieving fox? Dora is annoyingly positive every step of the way (don’t worry, it’s a thing) and she sings about everything from her backpack to pooping (don’t be alarmed, I swear it’s still a thing). ’Dora’ also boasts great messages about fitting in and being yourself as only a teenager still rocking the same haircut, pink t-shirt and orange shorts can do.
- Jess Fenton
Read Jess' full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-dora-and-the-lost-city-of-gold-dora-meets-indiana-jones-and-a-song-about-poop

For once, Morgan Freeman isn't playing the US President in this rather run of the mill, political apocalypse film. He's actually the CIA director "Cabot" who is working with an analyst "Jack Ryan" (Ben Affleck) to try and thwart a cunning plan to detonate a recently stolen nuclear explosive in the United States so he can start an all out war with Russia. The fascists behind the scheme know full well that any such disaster will put the pressure on "Pres. Fowler" (James Cromwell) to counter-attack the newly installed Russian "Pres. Nemerov" (the dreadfully wooden Ciaran Hinds) and that all of their advisors will be suggesting a kill or be killed philosophy. The aftermath of the explosion further complicates matters for "Ryan" as he struggles to get to the truth, and then to get that to the authorities before all hell breaks loose. The story here works well enough but the casting is distinctly under-par. Freeman does as he alway does, as does Cromwell but Affleck is rather out of his depth with his more substantial role. He is just a bit too light-weight - regardless of how many cuts and bruises the make up folks give him - to step into the shoes of Alex Baldwin or even Harrison Ford with this more cerebral character. There are some decent pyrotechnics and for a while at the end there is a decent bit of tension, but it takes far too long to get the pieces together and though still quite a chilling assessment of just how destructive military might can be, it's just all a bit wordy and flat.

As a movie, it is OK, actually one of Afflec's better efforts. However, apparently the writer of the screenplay read a different book than I did, because "The Sum Of All Fears", the movie, had about 3 things in common with the book: The name, the main characters, and the fact that it involved nuclear weapons. Why change from Denver to Baltimore? The relationships between Ryan and most of the other characters is scrambled up.
Neither Afflec nor Harrison Ford got the character of Jack Ryan right (Ryan is NOT an action hero, he is a deep thinker with a giant inferiority complex who still manages to be a hero, because he HAS to). Actually, Baldwin got it closer in Red October.
If you haven't read the book, this film is passable, but if you expected to recognize Clancy's story, you will be disappointed.